Preview

Messenger of ANESTHESIOLOGY AND RESUSCITATION

Advanced search

FACTORS LIMITING USE OF ARTIFICIAL PULMONARY VENTILATION UNDER VOLUME CONTROL WHEN PERFORMING BRONCHOSCOPY WITH ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE (experimental research)

https://doi.org/10.21292/2078-5658-2017-14-4-38-42

Abstract

The endoscopic monitoring when performing percutaneous dilatation tracheostomy requires continuous (up to several dozens of minutes) presence of fiberotic bronchoscope in the endotracheal tube. Under a certain proportion of the outer diameter of fiberotic bronchoscope and the inner diameter of the endotracheal tube it is not always possible to provide proper volume of the artificial pulmonary ventilation and it can result in the hypoventilation. Goal: using the lung model of TestChest® Respiratory Flight Simulator to define the most important factors limiting the increase of minute pulmonary ventilation (MPV) on APV during bronchoscopy through the endotracheal tube. Materials and methods: fiberotic bronchoscope of 5.9 mm outer diameter was put through endotracheal tube no. 8 which was pressure-proof installed to the inspiratory limb of the TestChest lung model with setup parameters reflecting the respiratory system of a patient with no disorders of respiratory mechanics. APV was under volume control. The respiratory volume was increased from 350 ml up to maximum with 25 ml step under the respiratory rate of 12, 16 and 20 respiratory movements per minute. Peak pressure, plateau pressure, autoPEEP, pressure behind the tip of endotracheal tube were registered before and after insertion of fiberotic bronchoscope. Results: increase of MPV was limited by the preset maximum pressure in the respiratory tract. Under the respiration rate of 12 movements per minute, MPV was 9.6 l/min; under the respiration rate of 16 movements per minute it was 12 l/min; under the respiration rate of 20 movements per minute it was 13.5 l/min. However, under the respiration rate of 12 movements per minute autoPEEP made 5 cm. w. c. with maximum MPV, and under the respiration rate of 16 and 20 movements per minute autoPEEP made even 14 and 24 cm. w. c. respectively. On the compared level of PEEP of 5 cm. w. c. MPV made 7.6 l. under the respiration rate of 16 movements per minute; and under the respiration rate of 20 movements per minute with the volume of 350 ml. the autoPEEP made 7 cm. w. c. Conclusion. Factors limiting MPV during APV in bronchoscopy through the endotracheal tube are peak pressure in the endotracheal tube and development of autoPEEP.

 

About the Authors

D. A. Averyanov
S. M. Kirov Military Medical Academy, St. Petersburg
Russian Federation
Candidate of Medical Sciences, Teacher of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Department


K. N. Khrapov
Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, St. Petersburg
Russian Federation
Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Department


I. N. Grachev
S. M. Kirov Military Medical Academy, St. Petersburg
Russian Federation
Post Graduate Student of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Department


K. A. Tsygankov
S. M. Kirov Military Medical Academy, St. Petersburg
Russian Federation
Post Graduate Student of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Department


References

1. Аveryanov D.А., Dubinin А.А., Shatalov V.I., Schegolev А.V., Svistov D.V. Puncture dilatation tracheostomy in the patients with severe brain damage: cricostrenal distance as a predictor of contraindications. Rossiysky Neurokhirurgicheskiy Journal Im. Prof. A.L. Polenova, 2015, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 5-9. (In Russ.)

2. Bogdanov V.V., Kalinkin V.P., Guzenyuk P.V., Koshevoy I.O. Percutaneous dilatation tracheostomy. Advantages, deficiencies, specific techniques. Ros. Otorinolaringologiya, 2016, vol. 82, no. 3, pp. 171-172. (In Russ.)

3. Schepetkov А.N., Savin I.А., Goryachev А.S. Evaluation of ventilation parameters through intubation, tracheotomy tubes of various diameter and bronchoscopy with the use of test model. Vestn. Intensivnoy Terapii, 2007, no. 1, pp. 27-33. (In Russ.)

4. Yarema V.I., Yarygin N.V., Fruktov S.S. Tracheotomy and tracheostomy. Khirurg, 2009, no. 4, pp. 22-28. (In Russ.)

5. Bice T., Nelson J.E., Carson S.S. To Trach or not to Trach: Uncertainty in the Care of the Chronically Critically Ill. Semin. Respir. Crit. Care Med., 2015, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 851-858.

6. Ioannidis G., Lazaridis G., Baka S., Mpoukovinas I., Karavasilis V., Lampaki S., Kioumis I., Pitsiou G., Papaiwannou A., Karavergou A., Katsikogiannis N., Sarika E., Tsakiridis K., Korantzis I., Zarogoulidis K., Zarogoulidis P. Barotrauma and pneumothorax. J. Thorac. Dis., 2015, vol. 7, suppl. 1. pp. S38-S43.

7. Kuo A.S., Philip J.H., Edrich T. Airway ventilation pressures during bronchoscopy, bronchial blocker, and double-lumen endotracheal tube use: an in vitro study. J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth., 2014, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 873-879.

8. Lawson R.W., Peters J.I., Shelledy D.C. Effects of fiberoptic bronchoscopy during mechanical ventilation in a lung model. Chest, 2000, vol. 118, no. 3, pp. 824-831.

9. Nakstad E.R., Opdahl H., Skjønsberg O.H., Borchsenius F. Intrabronchial airway pressures in intubated patients during bronchoscopy under volume controlled and pressure controlled ventilation. Anaesth. Intens. Care, 2011, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 431-439.

10. Reilly P.M., Anderson H.L., Sing R.F., Schwab C.W., Bartlett R.H. Occult hypercarbia. An unrecognized phenomenon during percutaneous endoscopic tracheostomy. Chest, 1995, vol. 107, no. 6, pp. 1760-1763.

11. Reilly P.M., Sing R.F., Giberson F.A., Anderson H.L., Rotondo M.F., Tinkoff G.H., Schwab C.W. Hypercarbia during tracheostomy: a comparison of percutaneous endoscopic, percutaneous Doppler, and standard surgical tracheostomy. Intens. Care Med., 1997, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 859-864.


Review

For citations:


Averyanov D.A., Khrapov K.N., Grachev I.N., Tsygankov K.A. FACTORS LIMITING USE OF ARTIFICIAL PULMONARY VENTILATION UNDER VOLUME CONTROL WHEN PERFORMING BRONCHOSCOPY WITH ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE (experimental research). Messenger of ANESTHESIOLOGY AND RESUSCITATION. 2017;14(4):38-42. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21292/2078-5658-2017-14-4-38-42



Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2078-5658 (Print)
ISSN 2541-8653 (Online)